Moral Implications Research Articles

Obraz člověka a výchovy v Esejích Michela de Montaigne

The study deals with the question of the relationships among the conception of human nature, its cognition and education in Michel de Montaigne’s Essays. In the series of essays, Montaigne repeatedly rejects attempts to base his conception of human nature on antic- scholastic traditions operating with the general concepts of man. Montaigne’s specific Christian scepticism (“new pyrrhonism”) is the starting point and the argumentative method for rejecting the reliability of general concepts and definitions. Whereas scholastic (as well as predominantly entire ancient) philosophy assumed the existence of an ideal species to be the essence that determines each individual’s essential characteristics, Montaigne sees, on the contrary, man in the state of constant transformation, transition as crucial to understanding the human situation. This fundamentally transforms the traditional understanding of the relationship between a pattern and its imitation, into a relationship that has not only epistemological but also pedagogical and moral implications. Montaigne argues that subjectivity cannot be understood against the background of a general pattern, but only from itself, from ambiguities and paradoxes that, on the contrary, exclude, elude any generalization. Human nature cannot be captured in a general concept, it can only be exemplified from a specific experience. Thus, man is much more a transition (from one form to another) than a substance. The aim of this study is to show Michel de Montaigne as a modern and up-to-date thinker who, through his rhetoric and his way of grasping pedagogical issues, has opened up a number of educational questions that are relevant today: for example, how to understand the educational goal in a practical and informal way, how to work in education with the unique and the non-generalizable, and how to consider the relationship between knowledge and action.

The Moral and Ethical Role of Taqwa in the Personal, Social, Economic, and Political Spheres of Life in the 21st Century

This essay will examine the concept of taqwa as it is used in the Qur’an to illustrate how its application is fundamental in understanding its function in daily life decisions that may be applied in the 21st century. Although there are many translations for taqwa, I believe that the concept is best defined as God-consciousness. I provide daily-life examples to explore how the moral and ethical implications of this concept are relevant today in the four major spheres of life: personal, social, economic and political. The examples provided are based on experiences during my professional journey while serving either as an academic, chaplain, community leader or political activist. The analysis of of taqwa focuses on various Qur’anic verses that illustrate how to understand its application in the personal, social economic and political spheres of life. As I review each of these four spheres, I list verses in Qur’anic chapters that explain the impact that the concept of taqwa can have in daily life-decisions. The importance of maintaining awareness of God in all of these areas lies in the fact that God observes and holds everyone accountable for all of their actions and behaviors. God-consciousness allows us to subordinate our animal instincts to our rational faculty. It allows us to place the well-being of others on the same plane as our own. It saves us from being dazzled by wealth to the point that we forget that there are higher values to which wealth should serve as a means, but never replace it as an end. It is the only safeguard against the temptation to make gods of ourselves to impose our will on others. The challenge to religion in a secular era is to effectuate a link between belief and action. This article will begin by developing an understanding of the meaning of taqwa and then of its application to the four spheres of life in the 21st century: personal, social, economic, and political.

Moral courage and manager‐regret

AbstractIt has been suggested that moral courage in the workplace supports more robust application of regulatory principles. A workforce with the courage to act on moral imperative, it is argued, can bolster corporate governance and promote both more stable business organisations and greater economic stability at large. Research in the area investigates the bases of moral courage, a central implication being that businesses should invest in ethical training as a matter of public policy. It is standard to present moral courage as the strength of will to do the morally right thing. From a managerial perspective, however, this distorts the normative character of the kind of issues managers typically face. Doing the morally right thing commonly entails inflicting permissible harms. Such harms, though permissible, can be a source of moral concern to the conscientious manager. A difficulty for the standard account, then, is that moral courage may be expected in scenarios in which the moral implications of the manager's action have not been fully assessed. In this paper, an alternative account of moral evaluation is presented that incorporates the concern around permissible harms. The basis of such concern is found to be manager‐regret. Building on this foundation, we can establish a new definition of moral courage, that understands the right action to be that which entails defensible harms, and requires courage because those harms will likely have to be defended. It should be recognised in the academic literature that moral courage has this intellectual dimension. Furthermore, managerial training and practice should reflect this understanding of moral courage if its benefits to public policy, in particular corporate governance, are to be realised. The thesis takes a novel approach to the topic that draws, centrally, on the work of Bernard Williams, Martha Nussbaum and Søren Kierkegaard.

Comparing the German exit of nuclear and coal: Assessing historical pathways and energy phase-out dimensions

It is crucial to understand the dynamics of phase-outs of non-sustainable energy carriers to accelerate the decarbonization of the economy in hindsight of the climate crisis. Taking the German example, the exit of nuclear energy as a successful policy is compared to the phase-out process of coal power to provide new insights on such policy change. The historical pathway of each phase-out policy is examined as the basis for the comparison. In general, the German nuclear phase-out is driven by a strong anti-nuclear sentiment in the public and as a political strategy whereas for the exit of coal the socio-ecological movement, a severe drought in 2018 and a deep institutional academic and non-academic knowledge transfer for the climate crisis were the main drivers. The examination together with the deductive thematic analysis enables then to identify commonalities and differences of the two phase-out policies that manifest themselves in the following dimensions: institutionalization, visibility of impacts, public image, and incumbency. The ethics committee of the German nuclear phase-out in 2011 was a pivotal institutionalized actor in fostering the final exit. Its reasoning resonated in the public delightfully as it changed nuclear powers image and provided the argumentative pathway for the then chancellor Merkel to turn around her energy politics. Based on the acquired learnings, a convocation of an ethics committee to evaluate the moral implications of the climate crisis is able to foster the acceleration of future fossil fuel phase-outs.

How do Chinese people evaluate "Tang-Ping" (lying flat) and effort-making: The moderation effect of return expectation.

"Tang-Ping" (TP), referring to "lying flat" literally, has been a buzzword in China web media since 2021. As the opponent of effort-making (EM) behaviors which have both instrumental and purpose values in Confucian culture, TP has a negative moral implication in China and has been criticized by the state-owned media. Meanwhile, the meaning of TP also contains a negative form of resistance toward social and organizational inequality, which may be acceptable under unfair circumstances. This study employed the imagined-scenario method to investigate the public's moral evaluations of TP and EM behaviors under conditions of different return expectations. An online questionnaire with 2 (TP vs. EM) by 2 (low vs. high return expectation) between-participants designed scenarios were employed, along with the measurements of obligation belief of effort (OBE) and improvement belief of effort (IBE) scales (N = 210). The results found that (1) TP behaviors were evaluated as morally wrong in general, while EM behaviors were morally right; (2) the return expectation of the scenario moderated the behavior type's effect on moral evaluation, that EM behaviors were evaluated positively regardless of return expectation, while TP behaviors became acceptable with a neutral score under the low return expectation; (3) both OBE and IBE correlated positively with evaluations of EM while negatively with evaluations of TP. The theoretical and practical implications were discussed.

Psychology in national socialism: The question of "professionalization" and the case of the "Ostmark".

This article presents a contextualization and revaluation of competing narratives concerning the history of psychology in Nazi Germany. Since the 1980s, this debate revolves around the supposed "professionalization" of the discipline from Hitler's rise to power until the end of World War II. The question whether or not academic psychology has profited from collaborating with the Nazi regime during the war is not just of historical interest, but also carries strong political and moral implications. Recently, the established narrative concerning the professionalization of German psychology under National Socialism was called into question by Wolfgang Schönpflug. According to his argumentation, psychology did not benefit from the war, but had to suffer considerable losses on terms of personnel and quality in teaching and research. After reconstructing the historical context and the political implications of the debate, we propose to take a different perspective on the question of "professionalization." Three case examples of psychologists from Austria whose career advanced significantly during the war are provided to shed light on the multitude of opportunities that emerged for those who offered their psychological expertise during the war. In conclusion, it is argued that professionalization should be understood as a theoretical framework that stimulates further historical research on a local level, not as a dogmatic judgment about the state of the discipline as a whole. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Walking Badly

Taking Bruce Nauman’s video installation Contrapposto Studies, I through VII (2015/2016) as its starting point, this essay explores the postural, moral, and political implications of walking’s instability, proposing that the instability of walking underwrites its condition. It builds on the feminist scholarship of Adriana Cavarero to challenge the philosophical assumptions of masculine uprightness and to reveal instead the temporal limits of human balance and the essential threat of the misstep.

Call for Papers: Media and Moral Understanding

Call for Papers: Media and Moral Understanding

Murdoch on ethical formation in a changing world

AbstractIn the past few years, we have seen emerging new work that brings into focus the role of historical change and its moral implications in Iris Murdoch's philosophy. This paper strengthens this reading of her work and investigates the implications of this aspect of Murdoch's thinking for education in general and for moral education in particular. It resituates the Platonic imagery of the individual's ascent towards the true and the good in a framework where our conceptions of the true and the good are in a process of historical reconfiguration.

Bell Pottinger And The Dark Art Of Public Relations

The spurious and unethical actions of the renowned global public relations (PR) firm Bell Pottinger in early 2017 cast a dark cloud over the PR industry in general. Aside from the economic and sociopolitical ramifications that emerged in the wake of this scandal, it has tainted the moral standing of all public relations professionals, including those in South Africa. There is little doubt that tactics such as offering to manipulate a client’s online reputation through the use of fake online accounts, newly created blog pages or fake online reviews are unethical, and take the industry back to a less glorious time in its history at a point when much emphasis is being placed on both ethics and values-based practice globally. Moral philosophy provides a basis for rationalising human motivation in decision making and action. However, it can be argued that there is potentially a mismatch between theories and moral frameworks created for individualistic cultures, and their application within communal cultures. Building social capital in any society begins with a commitment to support the collective interests of the community. Thus, any discussion of thevalue of ethical communication practice for society must begin with a concern for the nature and integrity of community. Against this background this article utilises the Bell Pottinger case study to examine the tensions that arise between individual values and communal PR practice, and to explore the moral implications of ethical PR practice in a communal context such as South Africa.

Fashion, Thresholds, and Borders

Fashion, Thresholds, and Borders

The environmental and moral implications of human space travel

Humans have long dreamed of traveling to space. In response to the recent increase in commercial space flight, this paper evaluates environmental impacts of human space travel, both past and present, to shed light on the large environmental footprint of such activities. This environmental impact also has a moral component, since most of the global population will never be able to participate in such activities, yet still must bear the cost. Ironically, instead of a space future acting as a relief valve on Earth's resources, few activities exact a heavier burden on our planet's resources than the space pursuit, for the number of people it serves.This analysis utilized the structure of life cycle assessment. Data on launch vehicles mass and propellant type and mass was taken from public sources. Combustion emission results were calculated using combustion analysis software. These data were then combined with data from life cycle inventory databases and impact assessment methods to evaluate midpoint impact indicators.The hourly impact from sustaining humans in space over 1500 kg CO2-eq per hour. To put this into context, this is 2000 times greater than the emission rate of the average person on the globe, which we term global citizen equivalents (GCE). This global warming impact is also 650 times greater than the average person in the U.S.In terms of familiar activities, this is equivalent to continuously supplying at least 4 MW of electricity from the U.S. grid; simultaneously driving over sixty diesel buses; or occupying twenty seats on a Boeing 747 that never lands. Clearly such impacts raise questions not only to the sustainability of such activities, but also to the moral and ethical implications where such travel is limited to only the very wealthiest, but the costs are borne by all with few benefits to show from the endeavour.

Broadening the boundaries of accounting: a call for interdisciplinarity in the calculative era

PurposeThis paper aims to present a preliminary exploration of the intersections between the accounting and information systems (IS) disciplines. Using the illustrative example of the COVIDSafe app, released by the Australian federal government in response to the “wicked problem” of COVID-19, we demonstrate the value of interdisciplinarity to broaden the boundaries of accounting beyond a technical orientation to encompass social and moral considerations.Design/methodology/approachWe apply a high-level view of socio-technical theory derived from the IS discipline by using a close-reading method of publicly available media and federal government sources related to the COVIDSafe app collected between April 2020 and April 2021. This theoretical lens allows for an enhanced understanding of the technical, environmental/regulatory, and social subsystems relating to accounting and accountability while supporting interdisciplinary reflection.FindingsAddressing complex and wicked problems in accounting requires interdisciplinary approaches, whereby the accounting discipline must move beyond its technical origins. Dialogue between the accounting and IS disciplines is necessary to gain a deeper appreciation of the social, technical and moral implications of accounting in context.Research limitations/implicationsViewing accounting beyond a technical practice through collaboration between accounting and IS offers a theorisation to consider the multi-dimensional nature of complex societal challenges. This theorisation can support the advancement of our practice and research meaningfully toward a view of accounting that centres on ideas of the public interest and the betterment of society. There remains much scope for progressing this dialogue, and we commend other scholars to engage in interdisciplinary work on the boundaries of accounting.Originality/valueThis study illustrates opportunities for accounting and IS approaches to solving “grand challenges”. Further, the study answers multiple calls for interdisciplinary discourse in accounting scholarship by contributing a socio-technical framing toward addressing complex challenges in our calculative era by initiating a dialogue that moves beyond accounting's traditional technical practice or the “accounting information systems” context.

The Liability of Artificial Intelligence's Moral Dilemma

Background: Artificial Intelligence (AI) represents the fundamentals of the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Its advancement in technology has brought benefit to mankind over the years, which helps to amplify our daily lives in numerous ways. Among the technologies that have been innovated utilizing AI are Artificial Intelligence Lawyers (AI Lawyers), autonomous vehicles, AI judges, augmented drafting services and delivery drones. Although AI has brought many advancements in our lives, concerns are raised with regards to the moral implication of AI. This study aims to examine the situation wherein tools which incorporate AI would have to face a moral dilemma situation, or situations where AI had acted beyond what was instructed or programmed by the manufacturers. Thus, this work discusses whether the torts theory of liability on negligence is applicable in such a context. Methods: The methodology involved a doctrinal research in analysing the legal rules and existing studies in relation to AI and the negligence principle to develop a critical analysis of the literature. Besides, this research finds the application of principle negligence adopted in other countries, particularly in the United States, since it has employed AI much earlier compared to other countries. Results: The findings suggest that the question of the liability of AI is still at its infancy, as policy makers or regulators have yet to decide the liability of AI. However, the findings also suggest that theories of liabilities such as product liability and strict liability are possible to adduce liability on AI, so long as AI could be defined as a product. The research limitation is the scarcity amount of related studies available in the literature. The motivation of this work is in the importance to determine whether advanced AI may be liable for ‘moral decisions’ that cause damage to the victim under the principle of negligence.

Introduction

The Journal of Perpetrator Research (JPR) is an interdisciplinary, peer-reviewed, open access journal committed to promoting the scholarly study of perpetrators and perpetration of political and mass violence, terrorism, and genocide. One of the journal’s aims is to engage critically with the very concepts of “perpetrator” and “perpetration”.JPR fosters scholarly discussions about perpetrators and perpetration across the broader continuum of political and mass violence without confining its attention to any particular geographical region or historical period. The journal's mission is to provide a forum for scholarship taking place across a broad range of fields including history, criminology, law, forensics, sociology, anthropology, philosophy, psychology, political science, memory studies, cultural studies, literary studies, film and media studies, museum studies, and education. JPR was created with the explicit aim of providing an inter- and cross-disciplinary space for the study of perpetrators and perpetration, including critical reflections on theories, methods, and approaches beyond, and between, and across disciplinary boundaries. JPR not only addresses past and present issues related to perpetrators and perpetration. Fundamental questions informing the journal include, for example, questions of terminology, motivation, ideology, agency, processes and dynamics, as well as questions of prevention: Who or what is a perpetrator? How is such a label applied and by whom? How do such labels evolve? What drives people to participate in mass violence and how do their crimes unfold? What measures can be taken to identify potential perpetrators before they act, and prevent them from committing crimes? What can be done to rehabilitate perpetrators after the fact?Another set of questions informing JPR pertains to the status and significance of the perpetrator as a discursive formation in legal, political, historical, philosophical, and cultural settings. How do societies come to terms with acts of perpetration and with the perpetrators themselves? What role does the figure of the perpetrator play in the popular imagination for different audiences? How do representations of perpetrators change over time and across geographical and cultural boundaries, as well as across different media, genres, and traditions? Finally, JPR is also interested in exploring questions of theory and method. What are the ethical and moral implications of studying perpetrators? How do ethical considerations influence the methodological and theoretical criteria of the inquiry? How does one address the inherent ambiguity, limitations, and contentiousness of labels such as “perpetrator,” and the strategic and political implications of their application in different contexts internationally?We seek innovative work on any aspect of the study of perpetrators and perpetration, both broader theoretical and methodological interventions into the field and work centering on more specific case studies and examples. Because of the journal’s interdisciplinary and global scope, all contributions should be written with an interdisciplinary and international readership in mind.We also invite proposals for special issues or special sections clustered around a particular topic or theme. If you would like to propose a special issue or section, please contact one of the editors.

Ethical Challenges and Implications of Deactivating Mechanical Circulatory Support for Patients With Preserved Cognitive Function.

Ethical Challenges and Implications of Deactivating Mechanical Circulatory Support for Patients With Preserved Cognitive Function.

Critical Discourse Analysis of Literary Texts of NCTB English for Today (Class II - Class VIII) Textbooks: A Qualitative Study

This research has attempted an analysis of the Literary Texts included in the NCTB English for Today (Class II - Class VIII) Textbooks from the perspective of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) which is fundamentally a sociolinguistic paradigm to find and locate the internal ideological, social, ethical, moral and political implications encoded in the texts. CDA has been adopted both as a theoretical and methodological framework to carry out the research. Literary texts like poetry, short story etc. have been used as a secondary source materials and data collected from students and teachers from 20 Government primary schools and 10 secondary schools covering 1500 students and 150 teachers as primary data for this research. The primary data has been collected through survey questionnaire and focused group discussion. The collected data has been analyzed using qualitative methods like Content analysis, Narrative analysis, Thematic analysis, Grounded theory (GT) and Interpretive phenomenological analysis (IPA). Various Computer-assisted qualitative data analysis software (CAQDAS) like ATLAS.ti, Dedoose (mixed methods), MAXQDA (mixed methods), NVivo and QDA MINER have been used where necessary to analyze in-depth interviews. The collected data have been analyzed using NVivo software depending on the similarities; the data have been then grouped into categories and themes. These patterned themes have emerged objectively out of the data as emergent themes. The findings from the data shows that 33% of the total student respondents do not at all read the literary texts, 33% of the teacher respondents do not teach or discuss literary texts in the classrooms and only 16% of the students read the literary texts on their own. The literary texts are totally skipped and ignored by around 8% of the student respondents and only 8% of students and teachers read and teach the literary texts effectively as intended. Other results from the data analysis show that majority ..............

Familial Complicity in Peter Pontiac's Kraut, Nora Krug's Belonging, and Serena Katt's Sunday's Child

The Journal of Perpetrator Research (JPR) is an interdisciplinary, peer-reviewed, open access journal committed to promoting the scholarly study of perpetrators and perpetration of political and mass violence, terrorism, and genocide. One of the journal’s aims is to engage critically with the very concepts of “perpetrator” and “perpetration”.JPR fosters scholarly discussions about perpetrators and perpetration across the broader continuum of political and mass violence without confining its attention to any particular geographical region or historical period. The journal's mission is to provide a forum for scholarship taking place across a broad range of fields including history, criminology, law, forensics, sociology, anthropology, philosophy, psychology, political science, memory studies, cultural studies, literary studies, film and media studies, museum studies, and education. JPR was created with the explicit aim of providing an inter- and cross-disciplinary space for the study of perpetrators and perpetration, including critical reflections on theories, methods, and approaches beyond, and between, and across disciplinary boundaries. JPR not only addresses past and present issues related to perpetrators and perpetration. Fundamental questions informing the journal include, for example, questions of terminology, motivation, ideology, agency, processes and dynamics, as well as questions of prevention: Who or what is a perpetrator? How is such a label applied and by whom? How do such labels evolve? What drives people to participate in mass violence and how do their crimes unfold? What measures can be taken to identify potential perpetrators before they act, and prevent them from committing crimes? What can be done to rehabilitate perpetrators after the fact?Another set of questions informing JPR pertains to the status and significance of the perpetrator as a discursive formation in legal, political, historical, philosophical, and cultural settings. How do societies come to terms with acts of perpetration and with the perpetrators themselves? What role does the figure of the perpetrator play in the popular imagination for different audiences? How do representations of perpetrators change over time and across geographical and cultural boundaries, as well as across different media, genres, and traditions? Finally, JPR is also interested in exploring questions of theory and method. What are the ethical and moral implications of studying perpetrators? How do ethical considerations influence the methodological and theoretical criteria of the inquiry? How does one address the inherent ambiguity, limitations, and contentiousness of labels such as “perpetrator,” and the strategic and political implications of their application in different contexts internationally?We seek innovative work on any aspect of the study of perpetrators and perpetration, both broader theoretical and methodological interventions into the field and work centering on more specific case studies and examples. Because of the journal’s interdisciplinary and global scope, all contributions should be written with an interdisciplinary and international readership in mind.We also invite proposals for special issues or special sections clustered around a particular topic or theme. If you would like to propose a special issue or section, please contact one of the editors.

Looking at the Perpetrator in Nina Bunjevac’s Fatherland

The Journal of Perpetrator Research (JPR) is an interdisciplinary, peer-reviewed, open access journal committed to promoting the scholarly study of perpetrators and perpetration of political and mass violence, terrorism, and genocide. One of the journal’s aims is to engage critically with the very concepts of “perpetrator” and “perpetration”.JPR fosters scholarly discussions about perpetrators and perpetration across the broader continuum of political and mass violence without confining its attention to any particular geographical region or historical period. The journal's mission is to provide a forum for scholarship taking place across a broad range of fields including history, criminology, law, forensics, sociology, anthropology, philosophy, psychology, political science, memory studies, cultural studies, literary studies, film and media studies, museum studies, and education. JPR was created with the explicit aim of providing an inter- and cross-disciplinary space for the study of perpetrators and perpetration, including critical reflections on theories, methods, and approaches beyond, and between, and across disciplinary boundaries. JPR not only addresses past and present issues related to perpetrators and perpetration. Fundamental questions informing the journal include, for example, questions of terminology, motivation, ideology, agency, processes and dynamics, as well as questions of prevention: Who or what is a perpetrator? How is such a label applied and by whom? How do such labels evolve? What drives people to participate in mass violence and how do their crimes unfold? What measures can be taken to identify potential perpetrators before they act, and prevent them from committing crimes? What can be done to rehabilitate perpetrators after the fact?Another set of questions informing JPR pertains to the status and significance of the perpetrator as a discursive formation in legal, political, historical, philosophical, and cultural settings. How do societies come to terms with acts of perpetration and with the perpetrators themselves? What role does the figure of the perpetrator play in the popular imagination for different audiences? How do representations of perpetrators change over time and across geographical and cultural boundaries, as well as across different media, genres, and traditions? Finally, JPR is also interested in exploring questions of theory and method. What are the ethical and moral implications of studying perpetrators? How do ethical considerations influence the methodological and theoretical criteria of the inquiry? How does one address the inherent ambiguity, limitations, and contentiousness of labels such as “perpetrator,” and the strategic and political implications of their application in different contexts internationally?We seek innovative work on any aspect of the study of perpetrators and perpetration, both broader theoretical and methodological interventions into the field and work centering on more specific case studies and examples. Because of the journal’s interdisciplinary and global scope, all contributions should be written with an interdisciplinary and international readership in mind.We also invite proposals for special issues or special sections clustered around a particular topic or theme. If you would like to propose a special issue or section, please contact one of the editors.

Cultural Genocide in Joe Sacco's Paying the Land

The Journal of Perpetrator Research (JPR) is an interdisciplinary, peer-reviewed, open access journal committed to promoting the scholarly study of perpetrators and perpetration of political and mass violence, terrorism, and genocide. One of the journal’s aims is to engage critically with the very concepts of “perpetrator” and “perpetration”.JPR fosters scholarly discussions about perpetrators and perpetration across the broader continuum of political and mass violence without confining its attention to any particular geographical region or historical period. The journal's mission is to provide a forum for scholarship taking place across a broad range of fields including history, criminology, law, forensics, sociology, anthropology, philosophy, psychology, political science, memory studies, cultural studies, literary studies, film and media studies, museum studies, and education. JPR was created with the explicit aim of providing an inter- and cross-disciplinary space for the study of perpetrators and perpetration, including critical reflections on theories, methods, and approaches beyond, and between, and across disciplinary boundaries. JPR not only addresses past and present issues related to perpetrators and perpetration. Fundamental questions informing the journal include, for example, questions of terminology, motivation, ideology, agency, processes and dynamics, as well as questions of prevention: Who or what is a perpetrator? How is such a label applied and by whom? How do such labels evolve? What drives people to participate in mass violence and how do their crimes unfold? What measures can be taken to identify potential perpetrators before they act, and prevent them from committing crimes? What can be done to rehabilitate perpetrators after the fact?Another set of questions informing JPR pertains to the status and significance of the perpetrator as a discursive formation in legal, political, historical, philosophical, and cultural settings. How do societies come to terms with acts of perpetration and with the perpetrators themselves? What role does the figure of the perpetrator play in the popular imagination for different audiences? How do representations of perpetrators change over time and across geographical and cultural boundaries, as well as across different media, genres, and traditions? Finally, JPR is also interested in exploring questions of theory and method. What are the ethical and moral implications of studying perpetrators? How do ethical considerations influence the methodological and theoretical criteria of the inquiry? How does one address the inherent ambiguity, limitations, and contentiousness of labels such as “perpetrator,” and the strategic and political implications of their application in different contexts internationally?We seek innovative work on any aspect of the study of perpetrators and perpetration, both broader theoretical and methodological interventions into the field and work centering on more specific case studies and examples. Because of the journal’s interdisciplinary and global scope, all contributions should be written with an interdisciplinary and international readership in mind.We also invite proposals for special issues or special sections clustered around a particular topic or theme. If you would like to propose a special issue or section, please contact one of the editors.